click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121205
20121213
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
between john kerry and susan rice and susan rice is hanging out there now, and everyone -- all of her critics are taking shots at her. is there any reason to want to try to move this more quickly, the cabinet selection? what goes on behind the scenes here? >> i would take some exception with the way you describe it, andrea. look, these are important decisions. john kerry, senator kerry, and ambassador rice are extremely well qualified. obviously, there's been a lot of news around the ambassador over the last number of months by virtue of them benghazi situation. she is extremely well qualified. the president knows that. he is not iffing to be forced into a decision by virtue of the chatter that's out there in the street and the politics, and i think he is going about it in a deliberate way. there are a lot of other issues also going on that he deals with on a daily basis that are very real-time, and you also have the fiscal cliff problem. he i don't feel has the secretary of state who has said she will stay in in national hockey league a replacement is there. it is normal to get that
the president's still not decided about susan rice versus john kerry, and now there are a number of other players because this is a domino bit of business, where if susan rice goes to the senate department instead of john kerry, it would mean that someone else, probably tom donna lin will remain as chief of -- as national security adviser. it would open up the u.n. ambassador's job for samantha power. look at some of the players in play here. you have a team being weighed and balanced. susan, what are you hearing as to which way the president might go? >> you know, i think that you would have to talk -- the true answer is i don't know which way the president is going to go. i think he's in a box. he's gotten himself in a pickle here. it seems clear his preference is susan rice for state and that's buying an argument he knows that's buying a fight with the senate for confirmation. if he goes with her he's going to spend political capital there. if he doesn't go for her now, does it indicate he's backing off in the face of opposition which might send a signal. i think this was handled in a
, secretary clinton offering a vigorous defense of susan rice, the context obviously being the attacks on benghazi and libya and the republican calls for more information. is there anything to be read from the fact that we have seen both president obama and secretary of state clinton go out of their way in a way to defend susan rice? is there anything we should tea leave read from that fact? >> well, chris, i think the president and secretary of state were right to defend per. these allegations are completely unfounded. they're unfair to her. she is a very talented, very effective, committed public servant. you know you know how those sunday show work when administration officials of either party go on, they're following talking points that the republican or democratic administration, whichever party's in power, has constructed and that's what susan did that morning. if any other administration official had been on the air that morning they would have said essentially more or less the same thing. i don't think the attacks are fair and she deserves a chance to be considered for any offi
on this institution. >>> and this breaking news right now, susan rice, the ambassador, speaking on north korea at the u.n. >> without regard for its international obligations, therefore, members of the council must now work in a concerted fashion to send north korea a clear message that its violations of u.n. security council resolutions have consequences. in the days ahead, the united states will work with partners on the security council, as well as our partners in the six-party talks and other countries in the international community to pursue appropriate action. i'm happy to take a couple questions. >> reporter: my question is, what is coming after the swift, swift action of the security council? so, the issue of new sanction has been raised, obviously, but certain members of the security council is not likely to agree with a new resolution, so my question is, do you think it is possible to impose a new sanction without adopting a new resolution? do you think it is appropriate? >> well, let me say this, first of all, i've been through a number of similar council sessions on north korea and
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)